__/ [ BearItAll ] on Thursday 26 April 2007 13:58 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Lucovsky said Ballmer threw a chair across the room and shouted:
>> | "Fucking Eric Schmidt is a fucking pussy. I'm going to fucking bury
>> | that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to
>> | fucking kill Google."
>> `----
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballmer
>>
>
> I am not an expert in these things, but I think that perhaps Google has
> touched a nerve. I am also not an expert on law, but I believe it is wise
> to be very discrete when commiting murder, going by what I have seen on
> Columbo, perhaps there is a legal person in the news group that could
> confirm that.
I don't know if Lucovsky remembered that drivel word by word, but Ballmer
also threatened Schmidt directly. I wouldn't want to see those two people in
the same room, but I'd certainly wish to meet Ballmer face to face so that I
can teach him a lesson. I'd have him whining like a girl within a minute.
> Ok Ballmer just how do you intend killing Google. What product have you got
> hidden away that will do that? Because there is nothing that is currently
> released that is going to do it for you.
As Comes vs Microsoft exhibits show, Microsoft uses anything it can --
however unethical it may be -- to 'kill' potential rival. It's like a
suppressive regime that jails any blogger that speaks against the
government. The lack of industry regulation in the US makes everything
possible (only recently we heard about Microsoft's Men in Black).
> Google have the best of the search engines, they don't have the top spot
> because we are all in love with Schmidt, they have the top spot because it
> is a very good search engine and the Google pages are nice and clean and do
> 'Just what it says on the tin' with no other residue.
Google also has /momentum/ going for it. They track traffic and clicks. We
observed and foresaw this in the search engines newsgroups a couple of years
ago. Microsoft was hoping to catch up by acquiring DoubleClick. This
explains why they are so angry. They still want that antitrust to go
though... a complaint spearheaded by two notorious (if not nasty)
corporations.
> MS Search doesn't come anywhere near as good either in the search or in the
> residue. It could have done, you had longer to come up with good search
> algorithms etc, but you failed.
They keep changing names, interfaces (they have had some horrid and slow
ones), and they promise an all-new and super-duper relaunch once in a few
months so that people test the waters. Not close and no cigar either.
> Online applications. I don't regularly use Google online applications
> because I don't have a need for them. But I have had a look at a Google
> application base that one of our customers use. It is very very good, I
> wouldn't put it in the same league as IBM's WebSphere but it has the
> advantage that they is very little setup needed by the users. You create a
> log in, invite users in, decide what is shared. From then on the whole
> thing was very neat, quick responses, well layed out with no clutter (in
> the usual Google style). I was very impressed with it and can see many uses
> for it as a potential link between us and regular suppliers.
Microsoft wants to shove and forcefeed SharePoint to customers. It's a
lockin. A nast one, too. The other day, Alfresco's Matt Asay said they would
nearly bundle it, which is scary (verge of monopoly abuse). This assumes
that people use Windows and it relies on a desktop link, AFAIK. There are at
least 2 open source equivalent that are not free (one integrated with
OpenOffice). Alfresco is available as GPL software.
> The MS Share thing was plain crap in comparrison. I paid for that because
> my sales dept wanted it, spent ages getting it set up and the data onboard,
> it was abandoned by the reps very quickly. Just came up for renewal a month
> ago and I checked the logs to see when the last login was by any of them,
> it was a month and half after it was launched last year. So I didn't bother
> renewing it.
Oh, you beat me to it (I write as I read along), so I had mentioned
SharePoint before I saw your mentioning of it.
> How about .NET2 then? That should have been the one that got MS out of the
> doghouse. .NET2 was very good, it has faults, some of them serious, but
> nothing unrepairable. Add to that Ajax and you should have the most
> powerfull combination for quick design->finish web application
> developement.
>
> But after my first actual application with it, nearly a year later I went
> back to it because it might have been the right choice for a project, but
> absolutely none of the faults that were present last year had been
> repaired. Nothing had changed and looking at the developer web site nothing
> was going to change, it seems the faults are just part of the product.
What about IE6? How many years have those bugs lasted? They have become like
a birthmark you just learn to live with, with workaround memorised.
> So there we have MS's most brillient idea in many years and you have
> completely cocked up. Ok, it is being used and will continue to be used,
> but only by the fact that the developers have learnt how to avoid the bits
> that are broken, but some of those parts are so central to Net2 that it is
> actually quite hard to avoid them.
That is of course the danger in monoculture. A company without competition
has no motives to advance, fix, and improve. It's cheaper to leave
everything as-is, however bad it may be.
> So, {php|perl} and ajax remain the most powerfull developer tools for the
> web with MS's offerings falling a long way behind.
>
>
> MS just does not have anything out there that comes even close to knocking
> anyone's block off in any department. You have cocked up Ballmer, it is you
> who is looking like the pussy because you are not capable of holding your
> developer teams together and certainly not capable of attracting good
> software design engineers onto your side.
>
> The stupid part is that in other hands MS could have carried on being the
> top of every area, but now it has nowhere to go but down. RIP
They could have invested and developed, but there are conflicts of interest.
For example, 10 years ago they foresaw the danger of Web-based software.
People access software through domain names, so prebundling no longer
matters. That's why they killed Netscape and gave an ugly, buggy and tabless
Web browser, sending IE devs to Maui until Firefox shouted for change. Now
it's too late for Microsoft. And the rest is history.
Sorry about all these typos. I'm writing quickly.
--
~~ With kind regards
Roy S. Schestowitz | "I regularly SSH to God's brain and reboot"
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Cpu(s): 23.4% user, 3.1% system, 0.7% nice, 72.9% idle
http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information
|
|
